Papal visit: Bungled planning and embarrassing leaflets expose the public sector mentality

Telegraph ^ | September 13, 2010 | Andrew M Brown

[NYer]

Having read what Cristina Odone said in her blog post last night I have to echo her words. Archbishop Vincent Nichols displays real energy and vigour in his dealings with the media, and an ability to cope with difficult questions. He convinces and, as Cristina says, sounds like a human being. Sadly, though, these are not qualities that you can be certain of finding elsewhere in the Catholic Church.

Today’s Mail, for instance, highlights an excruciatingly embarrassing pamphlet produced by the papal visit team which compares the Mass to a “gig”, the Pope to a “headline act” and liturgists to “performers”. Supposedly this appalling, babyish leaflet is intended to inform non-Catholic staff about what is happening at papal events, but really it just patronises them, and leaves the Church looking silly. It baffles me how anyone could have thought publishing this was a good idea: it makes the Church, or its public relations department, look weird and disconnected from real life.

I think this is a real problem. Some of the bureaucrats who work for the Church are, frankly, ineffectual, and now the chaotic, lacklustre organisation of the Pope’s visit is exposing this to view. Nearly all Catholics contribute – and often it’s the poorest who give most – to the generous salaries and benefits of these employees. The public relations budget for this papal visit, for example, is enormous. It is not unreasonable therefore for ordinary Catholics to ask how productively their money has been spent and whether all these people are doing their jobs properly.

[NYer]

The leaflet containing 'helpful terms' for non-Catholics

[NYer]

I am not trying to talk down the papal visit, and I don’t like to strike a negative note. I just look at this Pope, at how hard he works and his fantastic energy and spirit, despite his great age, and feel that he’s being badly let down.

Catholic ping!

[Terabitten]

Although I am admittedly not a Catholic, I just don’t see a problem with this. How is it any different than simply translating from one language to another? It’s simply turning jargon (defined by dictionary.com as “the language, esp. the vocabulary, peculiar to a particular trade, profession, or group”) into a form people unfamiliar with said jargon can easily understand.

[AnAmericanMother]

Because it’s the Holy Mass, NOT a theatrical performance!

[Terabitten]

Because it’s the Holy Mass, NOT a theatrical performance!

Understood. But, let's just imagine this together for a moment.

Let's just pretend, just for a moment, that there is a religion called Flat Earth Vegetarianism. FEVs have a very large, and very devoted following, but at the same time, people outside their religion have virtually no knowledge of FEVism outside the most rudimentary basics - they are vegetarians who believe that the Earth is flat, and that they have a strange propensity for random capitalization.

Now, the head of the religion is visiting your town. You know next to nothing about the FEVs, so when someone calls you, wanting to reserve every hotel and the largest venue in your city for the impending Flying Spaghetti Incarnate visit, you really don't have a clue how big a deal this is. The caller anxiously informs you that you are going to have, in addition to the Flying Spaghetti Incarnate, a half-dozen Dweezils, at least fifty Caparisons, and who-knows how many Zoobits in attendance for the Frummert. Then he asks you, "Are you prepared to host a Full Frummert, or do you only have space for a Half-Frummert, or worse, a Quarter-Frummert? Oh, and we're going to need all the Squamishes you can get your hands on."

Clearly, you have no idea what on earth the guy is talking about. Wouldn't you appreciate the caller putting it into terms you can understand?

Please understand, this is NOT meant in any way as disrespect to the Church. I just think that perhaps people are finding offense when none is meant.

[Fido969]

Oh, gosh, those look like the terms we use at my evangelical church.

lol.

[Ransomed]

The level of edjumcations of the average Catholic is low enough, I reckon they should use the right terms, especially for the Eucharist.

Freegards

[Bigg Red]

As stupid as this is — really, is the target audience so stupid as to not know what an altar is? — I think the author is creating a tempest in a teapot.

[cothrige]

Although I am admittedly not a Catholic, I just don’t see a problem with this. How is it any different than simply translating from one language to another? It’s simply turning jargon (defined by dictionary.com as “the language, esp. the vocabulary, peculiar to a particular trade, profession, or group”) into a form people unfamiliar with said jargon can easily understand.

My objection with this would be that it is not in fact a translation. The terms being given don't correspond to the originals. And do people actually need to have terms like altar, Pope, and congregation translated for them? If so I hardly think they will know how to read this document in the first place.

[Mrs. Don-o]

There are 17 terms listed (each synonym in the left-hand column counted singly). Any English-speaker who has a 6th grade reading comprehension level would know or be able to pretty accurately guess about 15, with gusts of up to 17.

Those who produced this leaflet are assuming that the readers are imbeciles.